Ada: yes or no?

tristan twem2-lfs at eridu.org.uk
Sat May 18 05:31:49 PDT 2002


On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 02:01:43PM +0200, Gintautas wrote:

> First of all, IMHO Ada is honoured too much here :-)

I don't know it, but I'm going to look into it eventually :-)
 
> As  far as I understand, the book is just a guide to a useable system,
> which  provides  all the standard tools (which don't include Ada), and
> the  policy  is  that  it's  *your*  business  if  you  stray from the
> standard, tested path.

Well, we include a link to the BSD Init hint, that isn't the standard path.
I think we should aim to give pointers to any problems which may be encountered
by small deviations from the path like this one.
 
> > The other option is to only download the C and C++ parts of GCC, but I'm
> > personally against that, as people who require ObjC (for GNUStep) or Fortran
> > (Physics students and others) will have a problem. You'll have to give pointers
> 
> Yes, they will have a problem, just as those people who need Prolog or
> Lisp or Haskell or Scheme or Algol or PHP or whatever...

But they aren't part of GCC. And I know GNUProlog and SWI-Prolog aren't
self-bootstrapping anyway...
 
> > to hints detailing the installation of the others compilers which are part of
> > GCC. Anyway, I expect any package I download to be complete. GCC is the GNU
> > Compiler Collection, I expect all the compilers to be included so I can choose
> > to install the others.
> 
> As far as I understand, the book only covers the installation of C and
> C++  compilers  from  the  GCC  collection,  at least that's what it's
> authors  had  in mind (I may be wrong though) and maybe this should be
> stated more clearly in the book.

Right.
As I see it, the book only covers compilation of C and C++, which is perfectly
right. BUT the book tells you that you can compile the other compilers at this
stage. This is now incorrect since the inclusion of Ada in GCC. This needs
fixing.
My method of fixing is to just include a pointer to the relevant hint (or
to BLFS or whatever) to enable you to compile it.
The other option as I see it is to ignore the fact that there are other
compilers and not tell people about the problems they may encounter, which
will generate lots of repeated questions asking "Why doesn't Ada work" or
"Why can't I compile Fortran" (and lots of people don't read the FAQ
unfortunately). Of course a note could be inserted into the book to explain
this, but isn't this just as bad as a link to the Ada hint?

At the end of the day, it is Gerards decision. He'll probably choose what
he feels is best, and we'll have to accept that :-)

Tristan (who's agreeing to disagree as of now)
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list